Aim
Most pediatric in-hositalcardiac arrests(IHCAs) occur in ICUs where invasive hemodynamic monitoring is frequently available. Titrating cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to the hemodynamic response of the individual improves survival in preclinical models of adult cardiac arrest. The objective of this study was to determine if titrating CPR to systolic blood pressure (SBP) and coronary perfusion pressure (CoPP) in a pediatric porcine model of asphyxia-associated ventricular fibrillation (VF) IHCA would improve survival as compared to traditional CPR.
Methods
After 7 minutes of asphyxia followed by VF, 4-week-old piglets received either Hemodynamic-Directed CPR (HD-CPR; compression depth titrated to SBP of 90mmHg and vasopressor administration to maintain CoPP ≥20mmHg); or Standard Care (compression depth 1/3 of the anterior-posterior chest diameter and epinephrine every 4 minutes). All animals received CPR for 10 minutes prior to the first defibrillation attempt. CPR was continued for a maximum of 20 minutes. Protocolized intensive care was provided to all surviving animals for 4 hours. The primary outcome was 4-hour survival.
Results
Survival rate was greater with HD-CPR (12/12) than Standard Care (6/10; p=0.03). CoPP during HD-CPR was higher compared to Standard Care (point estimate +8.1mmHg, CI95: 0.5–15.8mmHg; p=0.04). Chest compression depth was lower with HD-CPR than Standard Care (point estimate 14.0mm, CI95: 9.6–18.4mm; p<0.01). Prior to the first defibrillation attempt, more vasopressor doses were administered with HD-CPR versus Standard Care (median 5 versus 2; p<0.01).
Conclusions
Hemodynamic-directed CPR improves short-term survival compared to standard depth-targeted CPR in a porcine model of pediatric asphyxia-associated VF IHCA.
In this large tracheal intubation quality improvement database, we found moderate and severe desaturation are reported among 19% and 13% of all tracheal intubation encounters. Moderate and severe desaturations were independently associated with the occurrence of adverse hemodynamic events. Future quality improvement interventions may focus to reduce desaturation events.
Aim
The American Heart Association (AHA) recommends monitoring invasive arterial diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) when available. In intensive care unit patients, both may be available to the rescuer. The objective of this study was to compare DBP versus ETCO2 during CPR as predictors of cardiac arrest survival.
Methods
In two models of cardiac arrest (primary ventricular fibrillation [VF] and asphyxia-associated VF), 3-month old swine received either standard AHA guideline-based CPR or patient-centric, BP-guided CPR. Mean values of DBP and ETCO2 in the final two minutes before the first defibrillation attempt were compared using receiver operating characteristic curves (area under curve [AUC] analysis). The optimal DBP cut point to predict survival was derived and subsequently validated in two independent, randomly generated cohorts.
Results
Of 60 animals, 37 (61.7%) survived to 45 minutes. DBP was higher in survivors than in non-survivors (40.6±1.8mmHg vs. 25.9±2.4mmHg; p<0.001), while ETCO2 was not different (30.0±1.5mmHg vs. 32.5±1.8mmHg; p=0.30). By AUC analysis, DBP was superior to ETCO2 (0.82 vs. 0.60; p=0.025) in discriminating survivors from non-survivors. The optimal DBP cut point in the derivation cohort was 34.1mmHg. In the validation cohort, this cut point demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.78, specificity of 0.81, positive predictive value of 0.64, and negative predictive value of 0.89 for survival.
Conclusions
In both primary and asphyxia-associated VF porcine models of cardiac arrest, DBP discriminates survivors from non-survivors better than ETCO2. Failure to attain a DBP >34mmHg during CPR is highly predictive of non-survival.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.